- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2008 09:12:54 -0400
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- cc: Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@comlab.ox.ac.uk>, Michael Schneider <schneid@fzi.de>, W3C OWL Working Group <public-owl-wg@w3.org>
> Ian Horrocks wrote: > >> > >> * 1.2.1 > >> > >> """ > >> An OWL 2 RL entailment checker > >> [...] MUST return True only when O1 entails O2, > >> and it must return False > >> only when FO(O1) ? R does not entail FO(O2) > >> under the standard first-order semantics > >> """ > >> > > This is again a naming issue, a bit like Michael's question on how to > refer to RDF vs. model theoretical semantics. But what exactly do we > mean here by 'standard first order semantics'? I have an idea, for sure, > but we may have to at least put a clear reference here... (RIF?) Yeah, I hope we can transition the rules to being written in RIF and just use a RIF reference. Someone needs to do that work, though. -- Sandro
Received on Wednesday, 3 September 2008 13:14:26 UTC